I just can't get down with feeling sorry for someone who is going to make 5mil/2 years instead of 6mil , sorry.

If right was right then we should take that extra mil and give it to some retired player who had to take a 2nd job in the off-season to survive. Its a business and 5 mil is still a pretty darn good deal.

I agree with the idea behind the post, and correlation does not equal causation. But if you look at all the great defenders who pass the eye test - Lebron, Tony Allen etc - they all have stats that match what we already know. They defend their position well and it shows up in stats like PER against. I'm not saying that putting Smith at the 3 is going to make every person he plays against look like Mbah a Moute on offense, I'm just saying that it shows what we already know. Monroe is not a good defender and he played in a bad system. This may have compounded the issue, it may not have. Smith is a very good defender, who has great length and lateral movement and it shows both on the court and in the advanced metrics.

I don't think that defensive stats are the be all and end all. In fact they are fairly undeveloped. But, on the defensive end, Monroe doesn't hold a candle to Smith. That specific stat was a single back up point.

Click to expand...

I think we are agreeing to disagree....but, in a more nuanced way. I don't think Monroe is Ben Wallace in the paint, however, I do think the vast canyon separating him and Smith, defensively, is much smaller.

Of course, but Smith played at the centre position for roughly 5-10% of his minutes and he really contained opposing centres. They were probably back up big men - and I happily concede this point. But this just reflects that he is a versatile defender - who is arguably tons more useful because he can switch off a screen from a small forward to a centre and still be extremely effective.

Click to expand...

I could see that, but I'm not a fan of putting my center in that position...although, he might see it more with a move to PF. I kind of want to wait to see what Cheeks' defensive schemes look like especially since we didn't have to give up Monroe to get Smith...we can see if they work well together.

This team has massive holes. Except at centre. Which as you pointed out, is the position Monroe plays. Drummond also plays centre and I will be surprised if he isn't on the all star ballot next year. PF is a hole. Since I am doubtful that Monroe will actually re-sign here, is trading a guy who will probably leave anyway for someone who is at least equally good and will stay for longer and fill a hole in our roster such a bad thing?

Josh Smith happens to be one of those people, you give up a bit of offense for a bit of defense. Everything is a trade off. I love Monroe, don't get me wrong, but at this stage you have to have doubts about his longevity with the team

Click to expand...

That's where we differ. I think as long as we give him a fair deal (which can be an issue in DET), he will stay. I think there are some players who like NOT jumping around from team to team. I get that sense from Monroe that if he can help make this team a contender he'll want to stay here. I think he has a lot less ego than guys to tend to move around a lot.

Fun to watch means people will be there. If no one is going to come even if it is interesting, how do you justify a multi million dollar tax bill to an owner? These guys make tonnes of money owning these teams. You are asking them to compromise that profitability when no one is really interested. No business ever spent money on customers it doesn't have. You build the base, and then you hone the product.

Click to expand...

They are on the hook for that bill when they buy the team. If it were based on attendance, all the owners of bad teams would have sold long ago. These guys already have their money. They would like MORE, but you only get more in the NBA when you field a winner. So, there are only a handful of contenders in the league and those teams end up being worth the most money. They sell more jerseys. They have more home game sellouts. They get more TV money. They get the additional income from going deep in the playoffs, etc...

All of those things come AFTER you put a winner on the floor, THAT's why owners end up overpaying for big named free agents because they know they can't get any of that extra money without having a competitive product.

I just can't get down with feeling sorry for someone who is going to make 5mil/2 years instead of 6mil , sorry.

If right was right then we should take that extra mil and give it to some retired player who had to take a 2nd job in the off-season to survive. Its a business and 5 mil is still a pretty darn good deal.

Click to expand...

Then don't. There's plenty of us here that can still have an opinion on the matter. I think it's relevant to this team's success and its ability to compete in the FA market, long term. It's not just Bynum. This team has a history of behavior like this and I think it makes it harder for us to compete. It's PART of the reason teams like SA and LA are contenders more often than once every 20 years.

Man...you'd think I suggested that WILL get the $56M. I just felt he should have been offered a bit more than that considering his performance.

That's a cop out. Sure he's not being forced, but he may really like playing with Drummond and the rest of the guys here. You don't have to resort to "go flip burgers" especially for a guy who is about to graduate from college. That's a pretty lame response, IMO. Guys can sign a deal that isn't actually fair to them. That doesn't make it right. I don't care how much money you make. Having a higher paycheck should not disqualify you from being compensated or treated fairly for the work you've put in. You want to talk about why this team is giving most of its cash to Smith who is a risk of not being a fit here? These practices make it hard for DET to lure players, especially, if those players see a pattern of "Succeed in DET? Option 1: Be low-balled on your next contract ...Option 2: Be shown the door before your next deal comes up. This kind of behavior eventually MAKES you one of the teams that no one wants to play for.

NBA contracts are CLEARLY offered based on past performance. A small number of them are offered on future potential. Neither of which has been considered in this case, IMO.

Click to expand...

The actions of the NBA GMs points more towards him being overpaid during his last contract since no other team offered a salary in that range so Bynum should probably have had a larger paycut to make things "fair". And no, players care about what number is on the contract in front of them and not if some other guy got a raise or not. If anything, being a bottomdweller because you are throwing away cap space is probably closer to the behaviour that MAKES you one of the teams no one wants to play for.

With this new CBA expiring contracts are no longer that valuable. Guys are only getting 4 and 5 year deals now. Most teams give a player at least 2-3 years to pan out, if they don't then they are essentially only left with 1 (maybe 2) years on their contract. Do you really want to take on a guy who sucks for 1 year just to save money a year earlier?

Click to expand...

Yes, if you want to target free agent X that summer. Expirings are still assets, but the new CBA made it more of a timing move than a cost savings one.

The actions of the NBA GMs points more towards him being overpaid during his last contract since no other team offered a salary in that range so Bynum should probably have had a larger paycut to make things "fair". And no, players care about what number is on the contract in front of them and not if some other guy got a raise or not. If anything, being a bottomdweller because you are throwing away cap space is probably closer to the behaviour that MAKES you one of the teams no one wants to play for.

Click to expand...

I disagree with you on the "overpaid" point.

...and you're kidding yourself if you think players don't pay attention to who else got a raise. As dumb as people seem to think they are, most NBA players are college educated. These guys are not stupid and they do notice these kind of things. It does influence whether or not they will re-sign or jump ship. It's not the deciding factor, but it does play a role in the decision making process.

Each individual determines what is fair. I feel that paying Bynum less is not fair to him after the effort he gave.
I am compelled to say that here. Bill Laimbeer suddenly making 10% less while some knucklehead at his university makes
3 times his salary would not be fair. I just wanted Bill to see the camparison at his own position.

Each individual determines what is fair. I feel that paying Bynum less is not fair to him after the effort he gave.
I am compelled to say that here. Bill Laimbeer suddenly making 10% less while some knucklehead at his university makes
3 times his salary would not be fair. I just wanted Bill to see the camparison at his own position.

Click to expand...

I would argue that there is a law of supply/demand that establishes a certain equilibrium that determines what something is worth.

I would argue that there is a law of supply/demand that establishes a certain equilibrium that determines what something is worth.

Click to expand...

Agreed. But mistakes are made which can affect outcomes, and those mistakes must be corrected to improve the organization.
Try not to look at this as just numbers on a sheet, but that real people are involved. people who we are counting on to mesh as a cohesive unit.

I like Bynum as a player. I'd much rather have him on the roster now than Stuckey. But I have to say I am surprised at the response to the salary figure he was given. We don't know what went on behind closed doors. We don't know if there were other teams that were interested. What if Bynum's agent came to Joe with that contract and Joe accepted without any bargaining? What if Joe offered him a $9M deal and Will turned it down? Sounds absurd? Well, so does the bulletproof assumption that Joe lowballed and forced Bynum to sign what he did. The fact is, we just don't know what happened.

Really, throughout his tenure here there's one thing that's been consistent with Joe is that he took care of his players. There is an overabundance of articles, posts, threads filled with people complaining about Joe overvaluing and overpaying his players (see the last contracts of Rip, Max, Stuckey, Prince). When he traded away Afflalo for peanuts, it was to a situation where he can succeed (and he did). When he traded away Billups, it was to his hometown of Denver, again as good a situation as possible at the time. He tried to retain Big Ben, but Chicago just offered him more money (BTW, I've always believed that the real reason why Big Ben left was because of the Saunders hiring). Years later, he brought Wallace back when nobody wanted him, just so he can end his career on a high node (see Bennaisance). Now Sheed is back to troll the sidelines.

There simply is more evidence out there that Joe takes care of his players than there is to the contrary. This is a for-profit business and not a feel-good charity. The primary goal is to make money. Within the restrictions dictated by that fact, Joe has done a remarkable job of taking care of his players. The size of Bynum's current contract vs his previous does not negate that.

Agreed. But mistakes are made which can affect outcomes, and those mistakes must be corrected to improve the organization.
Try not to look at this as just numbers on a sheet, but that real people are involved. people who we are counting on to mesh as a cohesive unit.

Click to expand...

This is how I look at this - I tend to look at my paycheck only, not look at anyone else's. And I knew in each company I worked for how much anyone makes. I did not compare my pay with other people's and if I disagreed with what I was making based on the merits I would bring it up at the time of my review and I would either get it or try to find someone else that can meet my demand based on my own merits. That's just IMHO.

...and you're kidding yourself if you think players don't pay attention to who else got a raise. As dumb as people seem to think they are, most NBA players are college educated. These guys are not stupid and they do notice these kind of things. It does influence whether or not they will re-sign or jump ship. It's not the deciding factor, but it does play a role in the decision making process.

Click to expand...

I guess we disagree on all covered topics but that's fine. I do agree they pay some attention to who gets a raise but in a way that influences them to demand more to sign here, not less. And I'm even more convinced that throwing parts of the saved Bynum money their way have alot more effect than handing them the news that Bynum got a raise.

How many players are currently under contract? Dumars still has to sign draftees, right?

Click to expand...

The best I can tell if we sign all 3 draftee's were at 16 now. So we have to dump somebody or make a 2-1 trade before the season starts.... English hasn't had his 2nd season picked up either... so that could drop us to 15 I guess.

I guess we disagree on all covered topics but that's fine. I do agree they pay some attention to who gets a raise but in a way that influences them to demand more to sign here, not less. And I'm even more convinced that throwing parts of the saved Bynum money their way have alot more effect than handing them the news that Bynum got a raise.

Click to expand...

For players who aren't already here, yes, I agree with you. My main concern is usually with guys who are already here and doing a great job. Those are the guys I'd like to see us offer more money to so that we stay competitive longer and it becomes a premium for FAs to JOIN our franchise, so we're not bidding to CONVINCE them.